The excitement of the Olympics may be over for another four years but the controversy continues. I refer, of course, to the outrage provoked by the use of the verb "to medal". A sure sign, according to some, that the linguistic barbarians are not only at the gates: they have battered their way through, pulled up a chair, helped themselves to a beer and are now undermining our very way of life by rewriting our grammar books to suit their evil purpose.

I don't recall such a fuss at Athens in 2004. But Great Britain didn't win so many medals then. Perhaps the question of whether our sportsmen and women can be said to be "medalling" has only really arisen at this Olympics because of our unprecedented success.

In fact, the term has been common among athletes for years. Here is a typical quote from the official Team GB website, long before we got to Beijing: "The team includes athletes who have medalled at Olympic, World and European level, so this is an exciting proposition for the Games."

But while as a headline writer I would have loved to see "Tweddle medals" in the Guardian (sadly, Britain's top female gymnast came fourth), there's no doubt that the expression sends a shudder through many people when used by commentators speculating over when yet another of our cyclists or rowers will "medal".

As editor of the Guardian style guide I've learned that, for some readers, our worst offence is to submit to what they regard as the creeping "Americanisation" of English, which they blame on television, pop music, the computer and similar new-fangled inventions.

Language changes, however, and the diehards generally lose the battle (which is not to say it is never worth fighting). I came across a copy of the 1950 edition of the Manchester Guardian stylebook recently and among "Americanisms" that it insists should be avoided are: balding, boost, call on the telephone, teen-ager (sic), and top secret.

So is "medalling" just another example of the way our beautiful language is being dragged to hell in a transatlantic handcart?

Well, not quite. As a letter writer to this page has pointed out, the OED lists examples of using "medal" as a verb as long ago as Byron, in 1822: "He was medalled." And this is Thackeray, writing in the mid-19th century: "He went home medalled by the King." The OED gives these two quotations in support of its first definition of "medal" as a verb: "to decorate or honour with a medal; to confer a medal upon as a mark of distinction". Admittedly this is a transitive rather than intransitive usage, but not so far in spirit from the second definition, the one we heard so often in Beijing - but dated by the OED from 1966: "to win a medal (ie to come first, second, or third in a sporting event or competition)".

There's nothing illegal, or immoral, about using a noun as a verb, despite what one American columnist calls "anti-verbing prejudice" from some people. He goes on: "Do these dogmatic whiners really eschew verbs derived from nouns? Not a chance. You can bet that they mouth off, mentor pupils, and head committees on proper usage. They probably even phone home, fax contracts, and Google people."

Gary Glitter has more chance of a Christmas No 1 than I do of persuading Guardian readers that "to medal" is OK, but I have to say I have no problem with it. It's quite useful to have an alternative to "win a medal". One of my Guardian colleagues has gone so far as to coin the excellent "outmedal" (as in "Bank on Britain's best squad for a generation to outmedal Italians").

If you are troubled by "medalled", I have to warn you: there is worse to come. As far back as 1992, an Australian newspaper quoted an athlete who hadn't won an event all season, "but has podiumed a couple of times". This seems to be going too far and bloggers have detected an "odium against podium". However, don't bet against Team GB "podiuming" a record number of times in 2012.